Date: Fri, 31 Mar 95 13:17:57 EST
From: "James D. Anderson"
MORE LIGHT UPDATE
December 1994
Volume 15, Number 5
Presbyterians for Lesbian & Gay Concerns
James D. Anderson, Communications Secretary
P.O. 38
New Brunswick, NJ 08903-0038
908/249-1016, 908/932-7501 (Rutgers University)
FAX 908/932-6916 (Rutgers University)
Internet: janderson@zodiac.rutgers.edu
Note: * is used to indicate italicized or boldface text.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * CONTENTS * * *
SAD NEWS
Nick Thorndike Dies
EVENTS
Mid-Winter Conference
1995 National More Light Conference
MORE UNHAPPY NEWS
Anti-Gay Professor Attacks Gay-Friendly Colleague
Janie Spahr Barred from Preaching in Louisville
RESOURCES
Life Stories
REQUEST
Lesbians Wanted for Wellness Survey
FEATURE ARTICLES
The REAL "Sin" = Prejudice = Ignorance + Fear + Hate, by Garnett
E. Phibbs, Charlotte, North Carolina
Will the Walls Keep Tumbling Down? -- A Sermon by Kent Winters-
Hazelton, Preached, June 26, 1994
Testimonies
Redwoods Presbytery Dialogue
Speaking the Truth, in Love, by Lorna Shoemaker
Dialogue on Gay and Lesbian Marriage, by Louie Crew
Monogamous Romantic Unions, by Eugene Godilo-Godlevsky M.A.,
Deacon, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
Spiritual Rewards at General Assembly, by George Link
Sliding Down the Rainbow: An Advent Story, by Chris Glaser
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
SAD NEWS
Nick Thorndike Dies
PLGC mourns the passing of Nick Thorndike after a long bout
with cancer. Nick was a student at McCormick Theological
Seminary, where he helped organize the recent forum on human
sexuality. He was a frequent contributor to the *More Light
Update*. Nick was also a librarian, a loyal member of the
"librarians caucus" of PLGC. At the time of his death, Nick was
at the home of his mother, to whom notes may be sent: Sarah
Thorndike, 237 Purdy Drive, Alma, Michigan 48801-2106.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
EVENTS
Mid-Winter Conference
Mark your calendars now for the 1995 Mid-Winter Midwest PLGC
Conference!!!! The dates to reserve are March 10-12, 1995. This
annual gathering for PLGCer renewal, fellowship, and fun will be
held this year at Stronghold Conference Center near Oregon,
Illinois. This is a beautiful facility on the Rock River,
approximately 25 miles southwest of Rockford, Illinois. Look for
details in the next Update. In the meantime, you may call Sue
Jones at 608/244-4820 for more information.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
1995 National More Light Conference
The 11th Annual More Light Churches Network Conference will be
held April 28, 29, 30, 1995 in Baltimore, Maryland. The Planning
Committee has been meeting for several months at First and
Franklin Street Presbyterian Church, the host site for the event.
In conjunction with the National Committee, the local planning
group announces that this year's theme is "Singing God's Song In
A New Land."
We have invited Virginia Ramey Mollenkott, co-author of the
classic *Is the Homosexual My Neighbor*, as the keynote speaker
along with Janie Spahr, Chris Glaser, Charles Forbes, and Herb
Valentine, among others, to lead workshops. We have asked the
Lesbian and Gay Chorus of Washington, DC to join us for Friday
evenings' entertainment.
Workshop topics may include gay and lesbian spirituality,
inquiring churches, PFLAG, holy unions, Biblical interpretations,
preparing congregations for change and others. The group is
currently developing a full range of diverse and inclusive
workshops designed to inform, entertain and enlighten us all.
Registration materials will be available in early 1995 in various
publications, including the *More Light Update*. If you are in the
Baltimore area, materials will also be available in the narthex
of First and Franklin Street Presbyterian Church, located at the
corner of Park Avenue and Madison Street in the Mount Vernon area
of Baltimore. Regular Sunday services begin at 11 a.m. and the
church office phone number is 410/728-5545 available Monday
through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
The More Light Conference brings together ministers and laity,
lesbians, gay men and nongays, who are involved in Presbyterian
congregations nationwide. Some of these congregations have made
more light statements declaring a commitment to inclusivity in
all aspects of their ministries, but participants come from
congregations that are at various phases of considering the issue
of gays and lesbians in the life of this denomination. The
conference is growing. The movement began with conferences
having 20 to 30 participants; last year in Minneapolis we were
over 150 strong, a far-flung community that came together to
celebrate and learn from each other.
We tend sometimes to think that the issue of homosexuality and
the church is a dour one, steeped in judicial struggle, political
maneuvering, divisiveness, and rancor. Indeed, the struggle for
an inclusive church is played out in part in committees and
judicial commissions, a game of stratagem more than love. The
More Light movement plays out the struggle in the daily lives of
congregations. More Light churches are most often sites of
exciting, caring, innovative and flourishing ministries.
Ministry is the focus of the More Light conference -- how it is
done in More Light churches, what the challenges are for
congregations, what the rewards are for congregational life. The
conference has become an exciting gathering of worship,
workshops, excursions, and good food. It is positive and joyous.
It is the church we want to create.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
MORE UNHAPPY NEWS
Anti-Gay Professor Attacks Gay-Friendly Colleague
According to a story in the Raleigh, NC *News & Observer*,
Wednesday, October 19, 1994, professor of Old Testament and
United Methodist Minister Lloyd R. Bailey has attacked Presbyterian
feminist professor Mary McClintock Fulkerson for her views on
the Bible and its appropriate interpretation and for her
participation in a "public homosexual rights event." Both are
faculty members at Duke University's Divinity School. Bailey
sent a 40-page packet to United Methodist leaders all over North
Carolina, claiming that his evidence "should prohibit Fulkerson
from getting tenure . . . at Duke." Bailey also "used the
opportunity to sound an alarm over increased support for gays and
lesbians on campus, including a movement to expand insurance and
other benefits to domestic partners of homosexual employees."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Janie Spahr Barred from Preaching in Louisville
The exile of Presbyterian lesbian evangelist Rev. Dr. Jane Adams
Spahr has extended even to the national headquarters of the
Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) in Louisville, KY. Here's the story
by Jerry L. Van Marter from the Presbyterian News Service (*News
Briefs* - 9442, October 21, 1994):
Louisville, KY. -- Two events at the Presbyterian Center
featuring the Rev. Jane Spahr, an openly lesbian Presbyterian
minister, have been canceled by the Rev. James D. Brown,
executive director of the General Assembly Council.
Spahr had been scheduled to lead the daily prayer service at the
Center on November 4 and then attend a reception in the social
justice program area of the National Ministries Division.
In an October 14 memo announcing cancellation of the Center
activities, Brown wrote, "In my judgment, promotion of these
activities during normal working hours gave an appearance that
positions were being advocated that were contrary to the
established policy of the General Assembly, and did not meet
guidelines calling for a balanced dialog across the church on
matters relating to the ordination of homosexuals."
Kevin Kouba, chair of the Staff Association Worship Committee at
the Presbyterian Center, said, "I am concerned and disappointed
that worship is being politicized." He said it was the first
time in the two-and-a-half years he has headed the Worship
Committee "that anyone has been told they cannot participate in
morning worship."
Brown said staff members could meet with Spahr at the
Presbyterian Center "with the approval of division directors."
He also agreed to pay reprinting costs for a brochure listing the
schedule of events during Spahr's four-day visit -- minus the two
canceled programs. The brochure was produced by a number of the
churches and groups that were hosting the events.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
RESOURCES
Life Stories
Here's a video resource for the General Assembly mandated study
and dialogue. Experience "Life Stories" on growing up gay in the
Christian Church. Meet Lisa, a clergy woman, both affirmed and
limited by the church; George, who has a doctorate in ministry
but is denied ordination; Doug, elementary school principal whose
school won "model of the year" in the L.A. district.
This new video has just been released by the Lazarus
Project, West Hollywood Presbyterian Church, 7350 Sunset Blvd.,
Hollywood, CA 90046, 213/874-6646. There are two presentations,
with a total of six persons sharing how their sexual orientation
has affected their lives. Those participating (whom you may have
met at General Assembly or at PLGC events) are Dr. Doug Elliott,
the Rev. Lisa Bove and Dr. George Lynch in one session, and John
Burnett, Laurie Fox and Dr. Bob Patenaude in the second.
This is an opportunity to meet and experience gay and lesbian
people in their life situations. Send a check of $23 (including
postage) -- remember the bargain: *two* programs! It is also
excellent for university classes. Churches and other groups can
use it as a model for live presentations. -- Peg Beissert,
Director, the Lazarus Project
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
REQUEST
Lesbians Wanted
Participants are needed to fill out a short survey (the *Lesbian
Wellness Survey: A survey by lesbians for any woman who has loved
other women*) for a lesbian graduate student's dissertation.
Anonymity guaranteed. Contact Jessica F. Morris, Lesbian
Wellness Survey, University of Vermont, Dewey Hall, Burlington,
VT 05405, 802/657-2999.
The introduction to the survey states: "Lesbian, bisexual, and
gay women are so often overlooked when information is gathered
about people's experiences. We want to change that! The purpose
of this survey is to get an idea of what lives are like for
lesbian and bisexual women in the U.S."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
FEATURE ARTICLES
The REAL "Sin" = Prejudice = Ignorance + Fear + Hate
by Garnett E. Phibbs, Charlotte, North Carolina
How do you feel when you are repeatedly accused of something you
didn't do? Or when you are assumed to be something other than you
are? Or daily blamed for what you did not choose or decide? And
for all your adult life you are therefore called ill, illegal or
immoral? AND if anybody REALLY knew you, YOU would be fired,
evicted, harassed and rejected on the spot?
Well, welcome to the world of our gay kids! No, PLEASE don't
switch channels on me yet, for I really DO understand where other
people are and why they feel that way!
For, you see, my family has been just up the road 100 miles since
1750, so I grew up as anti-gay as anybody else. Indeed, as late
at 1976 -- even having served for many years on civil rights
/ human relations commissions on city, state and federal levels,
as well as interfaith justice task forces -- I refused
sincerely to support legislation adding sexual "preference" to
the other categories of anti-discrimination: race, creed,
gender, age. BECAUSE, I said, "Homosexuals are DIFFERENT from
these other groups, since they CHOOSE to be." (Which everybody
but gays still assumed in those days.)
Within months, one of my own sons, then later a niece and a
nephew, realized they were gay. That catapulted me into a 17-
year journey of radical re-education -- as it does for virtually
every parent of a gay, and it motivates me now to want to help
OTHERS still struggling to understand the elusive TRUTH.
No, please don't run and hide behind the Bible! (We'll get to
it in due time.) For it is the same Bible which my North
Carolina-Virginia Baptist/Methodist preacher great-granddaddies
quoted in the same way to prove that slavery and segregation were
God's will! Thus were most churches caught on the wrong side of
history re racism -- as surely they will be re gayness when the
Supreme Court eventually finds, as inevitably it must, that
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is just as
unconstitutional as for race and gender.
In this baccalaureate season, did you notice how much was said
about the current buzz word of political correctness -- "freedom
is the RESPONSIBILITY for our own lives"? And of course, I
would not disagree with this any more than with apple pie,
motherhood and Yale!
Agreed, BUT try inverting that idea -- what do we do when a person
is accused, blamed, punished for something for which they are NOT
responsible, accountable, culpable? No loving parent punishes
her kids for something they didn't do -- hence not responsible.
No just jury convicts a defendant for what he did not do, indeed
did not choose to do. Yet this is PRECISELY what our society does
to our gay children EVERY DAY!
Never a discussion on this topic is held, especially in our
Bible-Belt homeland, that doesn't eventually, get down to that
old refrain -- "yeah, but gayness is a SIN". Yet nobody ever
bothers to analyze it as to WHY it has been called a "sin".
Except for that generic "Sin" which afflicts us all, EVERY
definition of "sin" I've ever known about has one essential
ingredient -- free will, choice, decision, volition. How CAN
anything BE a "sin" when in fact the primary ingredient of
CHOICE, DECISION is absent?
Yet, with psychological scientists having discovered a decade ago
that gayness is not caused by either a choice or parental fault,
microbiologists are now proving in the lab what we parents have
known instinctively for years -- that gays COME TO US that way,
didn't choose it, can't change it, and don't have to. Thus it is
immoral / unethical for US to judge, condemn, reject ANY person
for something which they did not choose and cannot change! Yes,
it IS that simple! No freedom / choice: no moral / ethical dilemma!
Think with me for a moment of three examples in the last three
decades, of how we have learned this fact in other social
experiences -- left-handedness, race and gender. As incredible as
it seems to us now, our society DID, even in recent years, judge,
condemn, blame and oppress certain people because of these
factors over which they had no control or choice.
Imagine yourself in a waiting room full of strangers. We cannot
tell by looking whether any person is Catholic, Protestant, Jew
or atheist; educated or illiterate; rich or poor; healthy or
sick; Democrat or Republican -- UNTIL they choose to reveal
something to us about themselves by talking. There probably is at
least one left-handed person who becomes noticeable. Do you
remember what we used to do to "lefties" in my boyhood days? Parents
smeared stinking sticky tar on their left hand, or tied it behind
their back, or locked them in a closet, while all the kids at
school humiliated them cruelly. But none of these "cured" it.
Next generation experts said no, don't make a big deal over it,
as soon as you notice little Johnny or Jane, just gently switch
the fork or pencil from left to right hand. Did that cure it?
No, in fact after a few months these lefties started stuttering,
and many continued stuttering for life, just from the trauma
inflicted by their misguided if well-meaning parents in trying to
"cure" their left-handedness. So we learned in the 50's from
child development educators what to do, i.e., "LEAVE THEM ALONE,
accept them AS IS, and LOVE them as just being different." (So,
by having learned this lesson well in the 50's, we hardly noticed
last election that all three of our Presidential candidates were
southpaws!)
Back to our mythical waiting room of strangers. We can't know
anything about those around us until THEY choose to reveal it.
BUT just let a person of color enter the room, and we can peg
him instantly, automatically classifying him by all the
stereotypes in our minds -- long before he ever opens his mouth to
say a thing about who he is behind the skin. Hence we are able to
react to him, respond, interact SOLELY on the basis of his
different color. This is to say it is his HIGH VISIBILITY that
makes OUR automatic response possible, and indeed we probably
will never get to know a thing else about him! But it's even
worse, not only his high visibility, but the INDELIBILITY of
his high visibility -- or its immutability -- that makes racial
prejudice and discrimination possible. Therefore, in a nutshell,
he is blamed, judged, rejected all his life for something he did
not choose and cannot change. Theoretically at least, we started
to learn this in the 60's. Yet, ironically, we've reversed, and
and many are now saying we want to make "them" INVISIBLE -- "out
of sight out of mind"!
Then there are others in our waiting room that are obviously
different (from me) -- women. BUT this is one difference that we
men LIKE, indeed we holler "viva la difference!" In fact we
thrive on that difference -- for it's what keeps the human race
going! Well, that was, as long as we could keep that difference
VISIBLE, so that we could exert OUR dominance by "keeping 'them'
in their place," i.e., at least symbolically "barefoot and
pregnant in the kitchen". BUT along came the hippies and
libbers movements, "mad as hell and not going to take it anymore"
-- burning their bras, wearing short hair and men's jeans, while
men went to long hair and earrings, and both created the
"unisex" phenomenon. So we men could literally not tell WHICH
gender we were following across the street -- and we didn't
like it one little bit, because it threatened OUR macho image
and POWER. While we have a lot more to learn, at least we began
in the 70's to quit judging and controlling people by our old
stereotypes of sexism.
(Sorry, we seem not to have learned anything in the 80's but
self-centered greed!)
But now in the 90's, we are beginning to face the last of our
four great prejudices and injustices -- homosexuality -- or more
accurately heterosexism. Back to our mythical waiting room full
of strangers -- we can recognize on sight those who are
southpaws, black (brown, yellow) or female. But there is a fourth
"minority" here -- as indeed everywhere -- gays and lesbians.
While they, too, are "different", their difference is almost
never so obvious. So THEIR "problem" (or rather OURS!) is
opposite, their high INvisibility. YET the other three bases for
prejudice ARE there, just as surely and destructively -- didn't
choose it, can't change it, and don't have to.
We heard generals last year testifying that "what you do in bed
is none of my business . . . I don't care . . . I don't need to
know . . . etc." YET that same mentality next week demands some ID,
"that's not fair to ME" -- I gotta KNOW, I have a constitutional
right to KNOW, whether I have a "queer" living or working next
door to ME, so I'll know how to relate to (read discriminate
against) you! These bubbas would indeed be happy to make all
gays wear that same pink triangle that Hitler used in the
Holocaust -- if not indeed a big "Q" on their chests to raise
their VISIBILITY!
So, ANYBODY who has suffered rejection, alienation,
discrimination because of their left-handedness, race, or
gender SHOULD be the MOST understanding and empathetic
supporters of gays and lesbians today! Unfortunately, however,
most people are still stuck in the old false analogy of "apples &
oranges" -- because gays allegedly "choose" to be that way! The
best scientific analogy now is that gays come equipped with the
same "hardware" as we (male & female), but their computer
"software" micro-chip just came programmed differently from the
factory! How long before we learn the basic fact, that gayness is
NOT some acts which people DO, but WHO they really ARE? Yes, of
COURSE, every love relationship with another person is a MORAL
or ETHICAL decision for both partners -- whether gay or straight
-- BUT the GENDER of the partners we fall in love with is NOT our
choice!
I promised to get back to the Bible "in due time" -- having
started with the "problem" we know to be the reality, we can
now look back and see what if anything they knew about it in
Biblical times. But almost all the misunderstanding and heat
over the Bible stems more from ignoring its historical context
than from particular verses quoted. Anybody who has passed Bible
101 knows that: every page of it was written by men who assumed
that the earth was flat and the universe geocentric; every page
of the New Testament was written by men who took for granted that
the world was coming to an end within their own lifetime; their
only explanation for physical disease was that the patient or a
relative had sinned; their only theory for mental illness was
invasion by alien evil spirits. And they accepted it as a given
that everybody is born heterosexual (As did we all until 15-20
years ago!).
SO, given how very little they knew about all these areas of
common life, WHY on earth would we even EXPECT them to know a
cotton-pickin' thing about the complexities of human sexuality,
much less homosexuality? Indeed, since all Biblical same-gender
instances refer to forced, pedophilic or prostitutional sex, they
really had no equivalent word for what WE know to be a
loving, committed homosexual relationship. Ironically, even
the word Sodomy has been given to an Old Testament story totally
different from the meaning we've given it. And the Elmer Gantrys
pull out those old holiness codes a yard long, admitting that
they don't give a bit of credence to any of the others -- just
the one about same gender sex! And any Biblical scholar worth
his salt confesses that Paul's one reference is a veritable
conundrum --using a word which has at least 14 different meanings
in the New Testament. It is not mentioned by either Jesus or the
Ten Commandments. Yet by contrast, the vast bulk of the Bible
has to do with love of all God's children, acceptance, affirming,
non-judgmental understanding, UNCONDITIONAL love!
BUT beyond the nit-picking proof-texting methods, THE only
point here is that the reason the Bible is of such little help
in this situation which we have so recently dared to understand,
is that the writers didn't KNOW anything about orientation -- any
more than they did about nuclear fission. So we can keep jumping
up and down, pounding our pulpits, waving our Bibles as "not MY
opinion but the 'inerrant' Word of GOD" till we are blue in the
face, but it will not change the bottom-line of biological
reality, and indeed will just continue driving nearly half of
our gay teens toward suicide!
Admittedly, this does necessitate a whole new paradigm, a totally
different way of understanding sexual orientation, rather than
any chosen "lifestyle". Yes, it is as radical for us today as
ole Copernicus' and Galileo's discoveries were for the church -
- and unfortunately, it took nearly 400 years for the church to
accept reality and finally "forgive" them for having
discovered the truth in spite of its ecclesiastical prejudice!
So it does come down finally to a matter of stereotypes, or
prejudice. That's bad enough, and in the sixties when we first
really went honest about it, we thought we had really identified
the "problem". But we're now faced with so many who avoid all
responsibility with "But I never brought any slaves over here --
nor beat my wife!" -- And we now realize that the REAL issue is
WHO controls any given relationship or system, WHO has the
POWER, to decide and choose the important issues NOW?
Isn't it transparent as to WHO makes the decisions, choices for
our gays and lesbians? On the one hand they do not make any
choice to BE gay; yet on the other, all their normal choices
(equal, not "special") are denied -- the right to hold a job
without constant fear of being fired, a home without being
evicted categorically, a normal social life without being
harassed -- all just because of how they were born! (Even as I
type this, news is breaking that our US Justice Department now
acknowledges gays as a bona fide group to be offered asylum
protection against being returned home to FOREIGN "persecution"!
What irony!)
Surely THIS is the REAL "sin" when discussing our gay children!
AND the most heart-wrenching part of it is the horrific secrecy
of that damnable "closet" (created by us, not gays, so we could
CONTROL them.) So the whole world suffers because we still
listen only to those who peddle ignorance, fear and hate, rather
than learn anything about the facts.
That is, tragically, UNTIL we finally realize that WE have a
gay in our OWN family! So, sit very lightly on your throne of
judgment, good friends, because when the bell tolls for thee,
believe me, you will spend the rest of your life eating your own
words of ignorance, fear and hate, never believing how
"sinfully" PREJUDICED you and I once were!
Shalom!
[BOX] Garnett E. Phibbs is a retired ecumenical / interfaith
minister / ethicist, founder of C.I.N.G.L.E. (Charlotte
Interfaith Network for Gay & Lesbian Equality); Parents-FLAG
member, officer, writer, speaker for 17 years in CA, OH, NC;
former member of Lazarus Project Board in West Hollywood, CA;
former member of More Light and Affirming congregations in
Presbyterian, Methodist, & United Church of Chirst denominations;
member of Charlotte Clergy Task Force on Gays; network contact
for the United Church of Christ Coalition for Lesbian/Gay
Concerns (4901-H Endolwood Rd., Charlotte, NC 28215-4181,
704/536-9348).
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Will the Walls Keep Tumbling Down?
A Sermon by Kent Winters-Hazelton
Preached, June 26, 1994
[BOX] On June 26, 1994, *Stonewall 25: the International
March on the United Nations to Affirm the Human Rights of
Lesbian and Gay People* took place in New York City. It was one
of the largest human rights marches in history and was part of
the celebration of the 25th anniversary of the Stonewall riots.]
Texts: 2 Samuel 1:17-27, Mark 5:21-43
As 1969 began, I was in the middle of my sophomore year of High
School. When I look back on 1969 there are many eventful moments
which come to mind. In early January, Richard Nixon was
inaugurated as the President of the United States, but more
importantly to me, in sports, a brash, young quarterback named
Joe Namath predicted that his underdog New York Jets would win
the Super Bowl, and he backed up his words. In the Fall, the
"Miracle Mets" won the World Series beating the invincible
Baltimore Orioles. And with his victory in the US Open, Rod
Laver completed the last Grand Slam in Men's Tennis.
Neil Armstrong walked on the Moon and hundreds of thousands of
young people gathered for a rock 'n roll concert in a small
upstate New York town called Woodstock. Tiny Tim married Miss
Vicky on the Tonight show and one of the most popular television
shows that year, the Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour, was canceled.
For the first time, children entered into the world of Sesame
Street. The most popular movies that year had interesting male-
bonding images: Easy Rider, Midnight Cowboy, and Butch Cassidy and
the Sun Dance Kid. But the movie that won the Oscar was a
musical, Oliver! Leonard Bernstein resigned as the Music
Director of the NY Philharmonic.
And far away from home, in the first 6 months of 1969, 6,358
Americans died in Viet Nam -- the highest casualty figure of the
war.
Before you think that I have a very good memory let me tell you
how I found out some of this information. This past week I went
to the Library and looked up the volume for the year 1969 in *The
Encyclopedia Americana* yearbook series. I wanted to read about
an event that I didn't hear about and in fact did not learn about
for another ten years. I went to see what the *Yearbook* had to
say about the Stonewall Revolution that took place 25 years ago
this week. That began an era of conscience raising about gay and
lesbian people who live and work among us, and a time of fighting
for civil, human and ecclesiastical rights for homosexuals.
And what did I find in the *Yearbook*? Not much. There was
absolutely no mention of the Stonewall rebellion which began when
the New York City Police began to arrest gays in a bar in
Greenwich Village called the Stonewall. At that time, in the
State of New York, it was against the law to serve alcoholic
drinks to homosexuals and the police would frequently raid gay
bars and either arrest a few people or collect a pay-off. But on
that night, at that bar, people said, "Enough!" A movement was
born.
But it wasn't mentioned in the *Yearbook*. In fact there was only
one mentioned of homosexuality in the book. The category it was
listed under was very surprising to me. It wasn't listed under
sexuality. It wasn't listed under movements or lifestyles. It
wasn't listed under society or civil rights. It wasn't even
listed under disease, which was what it was considered back then.
Homosexuality was listed under "Crime." I was stunned to see
that.
There was something that made this even more sickening to me. At
the top of the page there was a picture that told the story of
what crime was all about in 1969. It was the story of the year.
At the top of the page there was a picture of Charles Manson.
The murders his followers committed occurred in August of 1969.
Crime: that was the category that homosexuality fell into; that
was association that a major publisher made in chronicling the
role of homosexuals in society in 1969. In 49 states and the
District of Columbia it was against the law to be a practicing
male homosexual. To be a homosexual was to be a criminal.
Aren't you glad we have made progress from that shocking
statement? Aren't we pleased that in our society today gay and
lesbian people have standing, and rights and acceptance?
This past week, a Virginia State Court of Appeals overturned an
earlier judge's ruling which held that a lesbian woman could not
keep custody of her own birth child because, even though the
state motto of Virginia is that "Virginia is for Lovers,"
homosexuality is illegal. The earlier judge ruled that the woman
was unfit for parenthood because she was engaged in illegal
activity.
Two months ago the voters in Austin Texas voted to deny health
care and other benefits to the partners of City employees. The
opponents of the vote cast this as a referendum on gays demanding
rights that they were not entitled too, even though less the 10%
of the people affected by this vote were homosexual.
Two weeks ago at the General Assembly in Wichita, the
Presbyterian Church said that Ministers of the Word should be
prohibited from performing union services that honored the life
commitments of honor and love made between people who are
homosexual. In a quotation that the General Assembly News
Service used to capture the debate, a youth delegate said,
"Homosexuality does not reflect God's plan."
Friends, we can see clearly that we have not made very much
progress. For every stone that was taken down from the wall at
the Stonewall rebellion, we have replaced it with another stone.
The wall still remains.
In our reading from the Gospel we discover a story of healing
that is also about inclusion. As Jesus is making his way through
the crowd a man rushes up to him and gives him a command. "Come,
for my daughter is ill." The man is named, Jairus, and we
discover he is a man of position and stature, a leader in the
synagogue, among the religious elite. What a risk for this man
to reach out to Jesus. His actions would put him at odds with
the religious leadership, upsetting the status quo. He risked
his own position in the society. He risked the life of his
little daughter by approaching this charismatic charlatan, who
just might be a healer.
Jesus, sensing the immediacy of the moment, moves quickly to
follow Jairus. As he moves through the crowd he is touched. He
stops and turns around and inquires who had touched him. An
unnamed woman emerges from the crowd. She has been bleeding for
12 years. In that society she was an outcast, treated as good as
dead. No one could have any contact with her without being
defiled and declared unclean. But Jesus stops and he places his
focus on her, giving her equal importance to the powerful and
well-connected Jairus. When everyone else was calling her every
name in the book, he calls her "daughter."
While Jesus gives this woman his fullest attention, the daughter
of Jairus dies.
Let me make a crude analogy from this story. In this story
Jairus's daughter is the Presbyterian Church. We have rushed to
Jesus' side and said, "Come quickly, for our mission programs are
dying, we are losing members, our budgets are shrinking. We have
become too radical. We have become too inclusive. If you don't
come quickly it will die."
But as Jesus makes his way to the General Assembly he is touched
by an unnamed man who is dying of AIDS, or a woman who has lost
her job because she told someone who she really is, or a young
woman who is confused about the sexual feeling she has within
her. Jesus stops to make certain the person in pain is heard
and cared for and included. "Go in peace," he says. And while
he does this, the General Assembly dies.
But still he goes to the General Assembly. And while he is
there, he takes its hand and brings it back to life. The moral
is that we can make the difficult choices to follow God's call to
reach out to the marginalized people in society, to be inclusive,
to be justice oriented, and to know that Jesus can still bring
new, resurrected life to the church.
When will we start tearing down the stones in the wall that the
church has erected and that we have erected and that we continue
to erect between the church and gay and lesbian people? When
will we begin to understand that God does not exclude any person,
for any reason from the reign of God? When will we recognize
that our reading of the sacred scriptures and our policies and
actions toward homosexual people are reflections of the
heterosexism of our tradition and not a reflection of the will of
God?
For most of the life of the church, the scriptures have been read
as being hostile to homosexuals and homosexuality. In
particular, Paul has some comments that have been interpreted as
being very anti-homosexual. But we must remember that Paul is
not God, nor is he the son of God. Paul was a man who wrote his
letters reflecting the culture in which he was raised. It was a
culture that strongly opposed homosexuality. His writings
reflect that heterosexual bias.
But what does Jesus say? Recently I came across this tract which
is entitled, "A Comprehensive Study of Jesus's Statements on
Homosexuality." It's contents are very interesting. It is
empty. Whatever Jesus said about homosexuality it is unknown to
us. But what Jesus did, time and time again, was overturn
religious and social traditions whose purpose was to condemn
people. He refused to accommodate traditions that excluded whole
groups of people -- such as women, gentiles and Samaritans.
Instead he responded to people in need, regardless of their
status in society or in life.
It is important to keep in mind that no where in the Bible does
it condemn loving, faithful relationship of any kind. Perhaps it
is time for the church to stop doing so as well.
Let us look at it this way. One individual's sexual orientation
is a mysterious combination of chemical, biological, chromosomal,
environmental and developmental factors outside of one's control.
For the most part, one does not choose one's sexual orientation.
It is present at birth and developed through maturity. If this
is the case -- and most medical, biological and psychological
studies suggest this -- then we must ask, who is the sinner? Is
it the one who expresses his or her sexuality as he or she is
created, be it homosexually, heterosexually or even bi-sexually?
Or is it the church which proposes to exclude people from the
reign of God because they seek to express their God-given sexual
nature.
We must ask ourselves which is the correct reflection of God's
active presence in our world: the *Book of Order* which states the
"Membership shall not be denied any person because of race,
economic or social circumstances, or any other reason not related
to profession of faith" [G.10.0102a]; or the General Assembly
which says that self-avowed, practicing homosexuals cannot
experience the full benefits of membership in the church? It
cannot be both. We must choose which side of the divide we shall
stand for.
A few years ago the Episcopal Church was debating whether gay and
lesbian people could be ordained as Priests. Eventually the
Church voted that they could not. As the debate came to an end,
Bishop Kilmer Myers stood and spoke these words:
*The model of humanness is Jesus. I know many homosexuals who are
radically human. To desert them would be a desertion . . . of
our Master, Jesus Christ. And that I will not do no matter what
the cost. I could not possibly return to my diocese and face
them, these homosexual persons, many of whom look upon me as
their father in God, their brother in Christ, their friend, were
I to say to them, "You stand outside the [gate] of the New
Israel, you are rejected by God. Your love and care and
tenderness, yes, your gathering, your reaching out, your tears,
your search for love, your violent deaths mean nothing! You have
no place in the household of God. You are so despicable that
there is not room for you -- in the priesthood or anywhere
else."*
The stones in the wall are still there. There are the stones of
homophobia and heterosexism. There are the stones of fear and
ignorance. There are the stones of ecclesiastical power and
control. There are the stones which say "Come in, but don't get
too close." There are the stones which say, "Don't slam the door
behind you when you leave." There are the stones of rejection,
closets, and AIDS.
But we come from a tradition that has a lot to say about tearing
down the walls. Joshua marched around the walls of Jericho for
seven days to tear down those walls. Even Paul himself says that
"Christ is our peace, who has broken down the dividing wall that
is the hostility between us" [Ephesians 2:14]. Jesus went into
the temple which was full of walls that divided people, excluding
women, and gentiles and the unclean, and separating them from the
priest, and he turned over the tables saying, "This is my
Father's house and it is a house of prayer for all people."
When are we going to understand that if the Gospel does not
liberate, it is not the Gospel? May God have mercy upon us for the
stones we have put in the wall.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Testimonies
Redwoods Presbytery Dialogue
The Presbytery of the Redwoods held a dialogue on integrating
sexuality and spirituality at their September 16th meeting at
Westminster Woods in Occidental. Five people of different sexual
orientations and life experiences spoke about how they have and
are integrating their sexuality and spirituality (a lesbian
elder, a lesbian minister, a heterosexual mother of a gay son, a
male heterosexual minister and another heterosexual male.) Lorna
Shoemaker, a Presbyterian Minister, was the last speaker on the
panel.
First though, before the panel discussion, in the morning when
the docket was introduced, David White made a motion to amend the
docket to remove the dialogue and replace it with a discussion on
how to go about having a dialogue. After some commotion, the
motion failed. Then it was announced that the Safe Covenant
Agreement had been set aside. The night before, Mr. White was
able to get the Synod's judicial commission to stay the agreement
because the trial on that case is not scheduled to be heard until
January. We were fairly certain that the Safe Covenant Agreement
would not have ensured anyone's safety, but it did, at least,
reflect the general feelings of the presbyters. It was made
clear then that those ordained lesbigay folks who chose to come
out during Presbytery did so at their own risk and without any
assurances that charges would not be brought against them.
The lesbigay folks who had planned on coming out during the panel
discussion and the small group dialogue following the panel came
out anyway. They were all incredible -- as were our heterosexual
allies who joined with us. -- Sue Rostoni
Speaking the Truth, in Love
by Lorna Shoemaker
[Copyright 1994 Lorna A. Shoemaker. Used with permission. This
statement may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form
or medium without the express written consent of the author.]
I want to begin by expressing the pleasure I take in the
Presbytery of the Redwoods' decision to honor the request of the
205th General Assembly to enter into three years -- now two -- of
dialogue on topics surrounding our incomplete understandings of
human sexuality. I am also grateful to be among the five who
have been given the privilege of speaking before all of you for
the next several minutes. Gratitude does not, however, preclude
a certain amount of anxiety, which I believe all of us share in
varying degrees and for differing reasons. Strange but true: we
tremble more to speak of the mystery of sexuality than the
mystery of sacred; and to speak of both together . . . well . . .
Nevertheless, we try.
*On May 24, 1893, six-year old Eva Wolff went to school for the
first time. Walking into the classroom that opening day, she saw
on the blackboard in careful Spencerian script the sentence:
"The cat is black." An independent child, eager to get started,
she took her neatly ruled slate in her right hand and with her
left carefully began to copy. Starting from the letter "K" she
traced from right to left every single letter. With assurance
and delight, she presented it to her teacher. The gentle Miss
Williams looked carefully, and then, with quiet directness,
responded, "Oh, yes, my dear. But now suppose we take the pencil
in the other hand and begin at the other side of the slate and
the other end of the sentence."[1]
[footnote: 1. I encountered this story in a text, the title and
author of which I have since lost. I quote it with no intention
to claim it as my own, and apologize to my readers and its author
for my lack of rigor and consideration.]
In an analogous way, just as six-year old Eva knew without
thinking that her left-handedness was natural and appropriate for
her, I knew at a very early age that female bonding on the
deepest level was natural and appropriate for me. I cannot
remember a time in my life when I did not orient toward my own
gender first and males secondarily. I did not shun little boys;
but I did not find them interesting or especially attractive.
Very early on I recognized that males possessed privilege and
held pride of place; power resided with them. But, having been
late to understand the dynamics of power and status, it didn't
occur to me that linking myself with a male would lend power or
status to me, or that that would be desirable.
Little girls band together; so do little boys. Some, many,
experience a shift in orientation at puberty. I didn't. Women
provoked inchoate longings and fantasies -- men didn't. School
dances were not romantic. High school was lonely. My "other
handedness" or simply "otherness" prevented me from feeling
congruent with my peers -- I didn't feel what they felt when they
felt it. And I could not articulate for anyone, even myself, the
way the sentence of my life really ran. Not until late in my
college career did I allow myself to think consciously about my
own, real feelings and recognize that I was a lover of women -- the
word "lesbian" wouldn't cross my alert synapses, much less my
hesitant lips. I am ashamed to say that with astonishingly
little effort, I learned and believed that I was not wanted as I
was and would have to reorient myself in isolation and secrecy in
order to pass. I chose to attempt the writing of my sentence
with my other hand, from the other end; I chose to deny who I am
and to side-step matronly and patronly questions about beaux and
husbands with bland rejoinders about the right person not having
come along -- yet.
If your imaginations are slowed by the warmth and hour of the
day, let me simply tell you: this variety of self-denial is
deadly -- both spiritually and physically. You see, I am a lesbian
by birth and a Christian by baptism; and the latter took, too. I
was raised in the Presbyterian Church, nurtured by it, and heard
unambiguously my call in it, years before the words "sexual
orientation" or "homosexual lifestyle" were ever uttered in the
Church or much of anywhere else. I knew my life was in some
compelling and significant way dedicated to the Church of Jesus
Christ when I was very young. Every step of my life in the
teaching and structures of the Church blessed me and confirmed
me -- over and over again. Some of you here present have
participated in my preparation for ministry. Some of you here
present witnessed and validated my ordination to the ministry of
Word and Sacrament twenty years ago. And some of you here
present have shared my ministry in parish, classroom, governing
body, camp and conference.
Now, today, sisters and brothers, I repent in your presence. I
repent of having lied to you about who I am by preventing you
from knowing me in the fullness of my God-created being. I
repent of having spoken so glibly about my ministry and your
ministries, my spirituality and your spirituality, all the while
my own soul was withering within me for want of an authentic
word. And I repent most heartily of my slow, inexorable descent
into alcoholism, and the harm I did during that ghastly period of
my life; for I have come to believe, now, five years later, that
at the heart of my insidious disease was a need to drown the pain
of an isolated, bifurcated, disingenuous life, and that only when
I embraced the person I have been created to be and began to work
through my fears and angers, did I begin to recover. I repent of
believing conventional mores and the courts of the Church more
than the words of life and the power of the resurrected Christ
which I have experienced in my life.
I have prayed that God would create in me a clean heart. I
believe my prayer has been answered. I know now, from the
abundance of God's mercy, that my sexuality is sacred -- as is
yours -- and is essential to my wholeness and integrity -- as is
yours. I believe it is an expression of God's grace and love -- as
is yours. And I believe that as I wind my way out of isolation
and secrecy into community and truth that I will live an
increasingly spirit-filled spiritual life.
I understand spirituality as having to do with experiences of the
sacred within myself, within my relationships, within my
surroundings. I understand spirituality as having to do with my
way of believing, belonging and responding to the power and
presence of a transcendent God who is a paradox of utterly
unknowable and emanuel -- *God-with-us*. I might say, spirituality
is who I am in a community which includes God. And a community
which includes God has, to my mind, some particular
characteristics: that community welcomes truth; it affirms
creation; it constantly moves toward inclusion, integration and
integrity -- or wholeness, shalom; it seeks to recognize and
receive God's grace wherever it may appear; and it strives to
demonstrate grace-filled and compassionate love as a grateful
response. It is one sadness of my past life that I failed to
recognize a moment of grace seven years ago when the woman who
has since become my life partner, who is also a minister member
of this Presbytery -- Holly Hearon -- took the courageous step of
revealing herself to me and I could not reciprocate. We've
gotten beyond that!
But the community I am describing is the Church I wish to serve.
As I have come to know and be true to my own authentic self, as
my understanding of my spiritual center has deepened, and as I
have been compelled to rely more on God and less on myself and
human approbation, my ministry has begun to mature. And from
this day forth, I cannot imagine hesitating to bring my whole
being to every act of worship and ministry I celebrate. My own
struggle informs my compassion for and solidarity with other
oppressed peoples. My experience of God's transforming and
redeeming love through those who have stood with me, loved me and
literally called me back from death into life, gives me the
courage and joy to preach the good news of release to all
captives and proclaim the dawning of God's realm in our midst.
I am enjoined by my ordination vows to speak the truth to you --
in love.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Dialogue on Gay and Lesbian Marriage
*We excerpt Louie Crew's comments on gay and lesbian marriage
from a dialogue on the "Quest Coffee Hour," an Anglican internet
discussion on Ecunet. Louie is the founder of Integrity, our
counterpart organization in the Episcopal Church. The story of
his marriage to Ernest in 1974 was featured in the September 1994
issue of the **Update.** This is a sequel.*
Louie writes in response to the following comment:
"In terms of dialogue, I have several friends who are gay. They
seem to me to have a sort of permission for promiscuity not
allowed for the rest of us. Is this true, or just my bias,
again?"
Louie replies:
I can't speak for your friends. As for me, I have no such
permission for promiscuity. My husband and I have made
commitments. Our relationship is still young and vulnerable: we
do not want to adulterate God's blessing to each in this
sacrament.
The church, however, has constantly attacked this relationship,
constantly suggested that we are play-acting by calling it a
marriage and by claiming to experience sacramental blessing
through it. Nothing I have said or written seems so much to
disturb the church as my marriage. If I would get AIDS and be
decent enough to die, the church would give me a glorious
funeral. The church is not really disturbed that I have helped
bring faggots into the pews -- thousands upon thousands; after
all, they add to the collection plate and do wonders in gussying
up old buildings. Yet 106 bishops have recently signed a
statement trashing not lesibgay people, but lesbigay commitments,
telling the whole world that we are living in sin.
It's a bit difficult when those same people wonder why so many
lesbigays would not dare take on the awesome responsibilities of
a relationship. It's much easier and socially safer to sin with
stranger after stranger, confess, tithe more, and keep it all
private. Many have been known to make it all the way to the
House of Bishops playing by those rules. Three years ago, one
became vice-president of the House of Deputies.
Even at 58 I could risk less condemnation from the Episcopal
Church by having sex with 4-6 lonely strangers on my way home
from the coffee hour than the condemnation I risk in most
parishes by saying, "Hello, meet my husband Ernest."
The Church cannot have it both ways, however, even as hard as it
tries. We cannot at once trash lesbigay commitments and then
trash lesbigays for not being committed to each other.
Upon coming to their senses, at least two dozen priests have
gently, privately approached Ernest and me to ask whether we
would like for them to bless our relationship. With all due
respect and appreciation, we have turned them down, for you see,
God has already done that. She was the only guest when we
married on Feb. 2, 1974, using the 1928 *Book of Common Prayer*
in our tiny apartment in Fort Valley, Georgia. To go back to
first base (oops, my mascara is running with a sports metaphor!)
would be to say that Ernest and I are the ones who have
been living in sin: but it is the Church that has been living in
sin in its abuses of us and of all lesbigay Samaritans.
Jesus teased our ancestor about her multiple husbands and the
current one who "wasn't," but He did not go back to the House of
Bishops and sign a resolution to say how immoral she was.
Instead, He told how thirsty. The water he offers to us
Samaritans he offers to straight folks too: it's not who you are
or where you worship. Blessed heresy of heresies first revealed
at Samaritan Wells: God is a spirit, and we who worship God
worship in spirit and in truth.
The good news is that *repent* does not mean "bow and scrape and
apologize and be embarrassed and feel bad about yourself and . .
. ." *Repent* is at once both easier and harder than that: it
means "re-think."
May God give you and all other straight pilgrims the rich
blessings She daily pours on me and my husband. Our cup runs
over.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Monogamous Romantic Unions
by Eugene Godilo-Godlevsky M.A., Deacon, Presbyterian Church
(U.S.A.)
The September 1994 *More Light Update* was an uplifting and
enlightening piece of journalism. Recent issues had convinced me
that my gay/lesbian/bi/transgender brothers and sisters were
intent on rewriting the Bible and reinventing the Christian
religion to suit the perceived revolutionary needs of gay
liberation. Instead, the September issue contained articles
which illustrate the capacity of gay/lesbian/bi/transgender
persons to live in monogamous romantic unions as per the long
tradition of the Christian Church.
Although the rights of gays/lesbians/bis/transgenders are a real
issue in society today, and although no person should be denied
the basic human rights of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of
Happiness, including the right to work and have a home, simply
because of his/her sexual orientation, it is also true that the
Christian Church is not simply a microcosm of society as a whole,
but a community with its own rules and standards dating back two
thousand years and more, which require of its adherents
sacrifices and principles exceeding those required by society.
Promiscuity is at best an immature, and at worst an immoral
solution to the question of fulfilling our sexual and emotional
needs.
Even the proposed amendment to the Presbyterian constitution
which would require officers to be either married or celibate
(i.e., *chaste*), and which, although it has a Biblical basis,
would effectively, although not theoretically, discriminate
against homosexuals, would become harmless if homosexuals were
free to marry legally, as the test case in Hawaii will soon
determine. On the legal front as on the religious front, we must
therefore strive to make homosexual marriages a reality. The
Presbyterian Church will look awfully silly if it repeals the
rights of homosexuals to holy unions (which were always
considered as not equal to heterosexual marriages) only to be
faced with the necessity of recognizing homosexual marriages.
Without even labeling people according to a specific sexual
orientation, it should be clear that people should be free to
marry those with whom they fall in love, regardless of their sex
or the other person's sex.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Spiritual Rewards at General Assembly
by George Link
Among the abundance of spiritual rewards that I, George Link,
experienced as a result of my "witness" to General Assembly last
June in Wichita, Kansas, was a true sense of hope that our church
is almost ready to answer God's call for full inclusiveness of
our homosexual brothers and sisters. I'm sure many of you will
find this rather amazing after my scorching accusations against
the church following the Orlando General Assembly, but I now know
that this was only one of the many rewards God intended for me in
answering the call to witness for love and justice at Wichita. As
I shared with you in a previous newsletter, I experienced a clear
call in March to take my plea for change to the church using a
prayer vigil and bread and water fast during the seven days G.A.
was in session. As I learned on the fateful day at Christmas
twelve years ago when I answered God's call to say YES to my
homosexuality, you can't possibly imagine the rewards which God
will heap upon you.
I'll admit that I had some doubts about the wisdom of this
action, but they were dispelled after my story came out in the
May PLGC newsletter. I was amazed by the show of support I
received with cards, letters, and checks supporting me
financially (over $500 including a motel room provided by PLGC).
Particularly cherished were letters and checks from Rev. Janie
Spahr, Rev. Howard Warren, and Jeanie and Owen Wells.
I can't take the space to share all the great experiences I had.
so I'll mention two of importance. The first occurred as I sat as
a volunteer in front of the PLGC exhibition booth. A woman
charged up to me and waving her finger in my face demanded to
know if I was with "them" while pointing to the PLGC sign.
Mustering my composure I politely offered to help her. Hatefully
she proceeded to tell me how much God condemned me for who I was,
etc., etc. My prayer for God's help was answered when I was
overwhelmed with pity for her, and responded to her in love by
giving her a big hug, and telling her that Jesus loved us both
just as we are. I was afraid of her reaction because she became
rigid and I feared a heart attack. Thank God she didn't have one,
but she was visibly shaken as she staggered to her embarrassed
friend who stood some distance away. As they left I prayed that
God would free her from the heavy burden of hate and prejudice
she was carrying.
The second incident occurred as I was attending a hearing on the
Savannah overture, which would require all clergy and lay
officers of the church to be celibate or in a "marriage" of
fidelity to be eligible for office -- [Needless to say, this
"marriage" did NOT include our same-sex unions! -- JDA]. During a
hot debate an obviously troubled young man testified about his
struggle with the "sin" of homosexuality. He was crying, and as I
listened to him I empathized with his pain and prayed that God
would give me the chance to talk with him. Lo and behold, he was
standing directly in front of me as I exited during a break, and,
without hesitation, I went to him, and as I gave him a big hug I
shared my experience of saying YES to God and how it changed my
life positively. He thanked me and walked away with a smile on
his face.
All told I gave out over 250 pink fliers and nearly 300 "Say YES
to God" buttons. Most of those responding were supportive with
only three people showing disapproval. I was blessed by many
pats, hugs, and smiles. Needless to say, I plan to witness again
at G.A. in Cincinnati next year, and, of course, in Albuquerque
in '96, because I know in my heart that the church will answer
God's call after a positive report on the results of the
dialogue. For you skeptics, ask me or anyone who experienced the
work of the holy spirit on the reimagining controversy!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Sliding Down the Rainbow
An Advent Story
by Chris Glaser
[Copyright (c) 1994 by Chris R. Glaser. All rights reserved.]
Once upon a time, God was fashioning a rainbow in the
heavens. Jesus sauntered by, looked puzzled at God's
activity, and asked, "Hey, what's that?"
"I'm trying to make a sign," God said, "A symbol that
says, 'All is forgiven, everything's going to be okay. No
more worldwide floods.' Something like that."
"It's wonderful, Dad!" Jesus exclaimed.
"Quit calling me 'Dad'! Where'd you get that kind of
language?" God thundered.
"Down there," Jesus pointed to earth, embarrassed.
"That's what they keep calling you down there," he said, to
excuse himself.
"They'll get over it," God replied with a touch of
impatience.
"That's very beautiful," Jesus offered quickly, to
change the subject. "But can't you keep it straight? It
droops on the sides."
"I kind of like it that way," God said brightly. "It's
the way I made earth that causes it -- y'know its curvature and
all. It's in the nature of things. To rise so high, it's
got to have its feet planted in earth. And look at all the
colors -- it's absolutely fabulous! Nothing's too good for my
children!"
"What about the flood?" Jesus asked mischievously.
"Too much of a good thing!" God brusquely countered.
"But since they're likely to blame me, I've got to show 'em
I'm still with them."
"What are you going to call it?" Jesus asked.
"I'll let Noah name it. I did something right when I
created him!" God smiled proudly.
"You didn't create him," Jesus admonished, "He was
born."
"You think I'm not involved in *every* creative process?" God
corrected. Both God and Jesus peered out of the heavens toward
Noah on earth.
"He called it a rainbow," Jesus said. "It does look like
a bow."
God frowned. "Didn't you notice his wife whisper
something in his ear before he named it? *She* named it,
and he's taking credit! There they go again!" God said,
frustrated.
Nevertheless, God shouted down to earth, "When the bow
is in the clouds, I will look upon it and remember the
everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of
all flesh that is upon the earth."
"Rain-bow. I kind of like the word," Jesus mused. "It
did come after all that rain. Rain-bow. Nice ring to it.
Kind of romantic." Then, getting carried away, Jesus began
to sing, "Some-where, o-ver the rain-bow . . ."
"Will you stop!?" God admonished. "People live
*under* the rainbow, under my covenant promise."
"Which is . . .?"
"That I love them, that they have nothing to fear. That
our relationship is permanent. I'll always be with them."
"Yeah, but under the rainbow there's suffering. Look
down there: Job just won the creative suffering contest."
Jesus grimaced at Job's angst. "He droops just like your
rainbow. Is that in the nature of things, too?"
"Here, put your hand on the top of this rainbow," God
instructed Jesus.
"Ouch!" Jesus said as he did so. Then, "Ooh! Somehow
it both hurts and tickles!"
"Pleasure and pain are on a continuum. Life is that
continuum. From up here, at the top of the rainbow, we
experience both at the same time. But below, they experience
pleasure and pain as radically opposite, like two ends of the
rainbow. It's all in the perspective."
"So the best thing for them would be to develop some
detachment from both pleasure and pain?" Jesus questioned.
"Some people believe that," God answered. "But life
embraces both. That's what passion is all about."
"Do I have passion?" Jesus asked.
"Is the pope Catholic?" God laughed.
"Who's the pope? What's 'catholic'?"
"You'll see," God smiled. "Sure, you've got passion -- my
passion. And you're going to show these people what passion
is all about. That's why I want you to slide down one side
of this rainbow."
"You mean, go *under* the rainbow?"
"Your sister, Spirit, has been living there since
creation. She'll help you. But it will be difficult.
You'll be tempted just as they are."
"By you?"
"I tempt no one. But your perspective will change.
Sister Spirit will help you focus, keep the vision. Once you
grow up, I want you to fast and pray --"
"I have to start at the very beginning?" Jesus said,
astonished, "As a baby?"
"I think we should be subtle. Besides, all who enter my
realm must do so as children!"
"But I thought *this* was your realm!"
"Not really. My commonwealth is under the rainbow,
under my covenant. That's why I'm sending you."
"Don't they already know that?" Jesus asked.
"It's not so clear to them down there. Once you're
there, things won't seem so clear to you either. Doubt will
cloud your mind."
"I won't remember you?"
"You'll be inundated with stuff that might lead you to
believe you're not my child, just as many of them have
forgotten. Look to the rainbow, and remember."
"You know, God, someday people will be able to explain
rainbows . . ."
"I should hope so! I didn't create dummies! You'll be
their new rainbow, less easy to explain. You too will be
lifted up as a sign of the covenant."
"Will I droop like your rainbow?"
"Yes," God said, with great sorrow, "And you'll think I've
abandoned you, but I'll bring you through it and lift you still
higher. And you'll lift them, too, by the compassion you
inspire."
"Lift them?"
"So that they'll remember they are people of the
rainbow: diverse, beautiful, revealing the spectrum of life
just as the rainbow reveals the spectrum of light. They'll
march under the banner of the rainbow, proud of themselves
and yet proud of being a part of creation, a creation loved
into being."
"Loved by you --"
"So loved by me, that . . ." God's voice broke with
emotion.
"I'll go now -- I see they're waiting."
"And hoping . . ."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *